Vanir Ausf B

Armored Thunderbolt, by Steven Zaloga. Page 238

Overall, 81% of US tanks penetrated in Italy and Sicily burned and 53% in the ETO. The difference is because the introduction of wet stowage drove down the ETO average. Only 5-10% of wet stowage tanks burned.

An interesting footnote on the T-90MS Fantasy tanks that India totally did not actually order from Russia. The MoD wants APS but won't buy Arena because it's not good enough and won't buy Trophy because it's too expensive. http://www.defensenews.com/articles/india-wants-defensive-upgrades-for-its-new-russian-tanks

One adjustment. Air support is less puissant in the face of AAA.

I can't speak directly about the Australian choice, but one factor behind Canada's decision to buy refurbished Leopard 2s instead of continuing to upgrade their Leopard 1s was that spare parts were becoming prohibitively difficult to procure.

The tank crews that went ashore in Normandy were well-trained. The level of training went down as attrition took it's toll, but I question.the assumption that it was only a lack of training that lead to bailing unarmed. I think it was the experience of witnessing what armored vehicles do when you start poking holes in them and making common-sense adjustments to procedures.

Yeah, Soviet tanks didn't just burn, they would explode. It wasn't the tank itself but rather the type of powder the Russians used in ammunition.

"Suddenly, there was one terrific explosion. A shower of sparks, smoke and dust clouded my eyes as I screamed, 'Bail out!' Instinctively I shot out of my seat and was through the open hatch without touching the sides. However, I nearly broke my neck as the headphone plug snapped from its socket when I dived from the top of the tank into the road and rolled over into the dyke alongside. What a predicament! Only two or three minutes ago, I had been taking pot shots at the enemy. Now I was alone in a water-filled dyke. Having shed my suit of armour, I was unarmed and at the mercy of the enemy infantry." ... "The lone tank, mentioned before, had sneaked close and while our turret is still being swung to the three o’clock position a shell hits the front right and like a flash the chief’s panzer is engulfed in flames. Hatch covers fly open, the gunner bails out to the left in flames, the loader dives out to the right. The chief wants to get out through the top turret hatch but is caught by the throat microphone wire. He then tries to make it through the loader’s hatch to the right but bumps heads violently with the radio operator who could not open his own hatch. The barrel, having been turned half right is blocking it. The chief has to move backward. He pushes the radio operator through the hatch, is engulfed in flames for some seconds, in danger of fainting. Still, he manages the jump to freedom but he still has the steel boom of the throat microphone at his neck. He cannot pull it over his steel helmet. So he is hanging at the panzer skirt, almost strangling himself, while machine gun salvos are slapping against the panzer. With a desperate jerk, he rips loose. The wire, almost finger thick, dangles in front of his chest. In the hollow, scene of the attack at night, the crew assembles except for the driver, Sturmmann Schleweis, who remained in the burning panzer. He was probably wounded or killed by the impact. His hatch was free, he would have made it out otherwise. The gunner lies on the ground still in flames."

Pausing to grab weapons or supplies only happens in training. That grease gun won't put the fire out. "Crews were well aware of the likelihood of their tanks, specially the Shermans, 'brewing up' once penetrated, and that when hit or under fire, survival could be measured in seconds. To increase their chances of surviving being hit in combat tank crew paid great attention to the task of bailing out, some even going as far as entering combat with all hatches open to expedite escape... Moreover, although tank crews were drilled not to bail out until the commander had issued such an order, most learned to abandon the tank as soon as it had been hit or had struck a mine. Indeed, commanders often bailed out as fast as possible, without giving orders to abandon, for the tank crew might require them to get out first, there being insufficient turret hatches in some tanks." --John Buckley, British Armour in the Normandy Campaign

I tend to give my own bailed crews safe-ish jobs like observation posts if they are not totally Broken. If I am on the attack I will stick them in a halftrack or other vehicle since it doesn't make sense to just leave them behind to fend for themselves. I don't much care what my opponents do. If they want to use them as front line infantry I'll happily accept the easy victory points. RE: Sherman. The reason for the Sherman's outsized reputation as a burner is simple: it was the most widely used tank among English-speaking armies and was therefore the most prevalent in post-war accounts.

When crew bail out of tanks in the real world they normally don't take anything they are not wearing. The greases guns could be legitimately used for foot recon but bailed crews would not have them.

The friendly map edge is set in the scenario editor. It can also be a friendly corner if set to an ordinal direction.

Thanks, @BletchleyGeek Ian and I have both tested this same question. This was from before I was even a beta tester.

Speed makes little or no difference.

It's not 100% but it should be 0%. I've sent a note to BFC asking for the skirt armor protection vs HEAT to be removed entirely. Note that doesn't mean it's going to happen.

The Kontakt-5 ERA layout has been modified on the hull skirts. It looks similar to the hull array on T-90SM

Has some good times in Thule, back in the day

The UK has 227 Challenger 2s in service. France has about 400 Leclerc's total, not sure how many in service.

My understanding is that air-to-air missiles have a limited pylon life, i.e. just flying around with them on wears them out quicker, so the Russians occasionally bring out an Amraamski or two just to remind everyone they have them but mostly keep them packed away for a rainy day. Having said that, they almost certainly do not have many of.them. Even most western nations don't keep large stockpiles of expensive guided munitions around at all times. Ask the British and French: "Libya “has not been a very big war. If [the Europeans] would run out of these munitions this early in such a small operation, you have to wonder what kind of war they were planning on fighting,” said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a defense think tank. “Maybe they were just planning on using their air force for air shows." https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nato-runs-short-on-some-munitions-in-libya/2011/04/15/AF3O7ElD_story.html?utm_term=.d1042fea6c15 "At this rate we are using up five or ten per cent of our stock per day and soon it could become unsustainable," a defence industry source said. "What if the strikes go beyond a second week? We will simply run out of ammunition." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8400079/Libya-Navy-running-short-of-Tomahawk-missiles.html

Don't know about tech but most T-90s delivered to India arrive as knock-down kits to be assembled locally and IIRC the T-90SM will also.

I brought up the Indian numbers to show than manufacturing capacity isn't a limitation. The Russians only have around 400 T-90As to begin with. So we'll go with 50 per year. It's a number pulled out of the air but I'm happy with it. Are we all happy with 50? Glad that's settled.

Then throw out a number. How much longer does it take to upgrade a T-90A to T-90M? Twice as long? That's 100 per year. Four times as long? 50 per year. Keep in mind the Indians have ordered 464 of the things new-built and I doubt they expect to wait a decade for them. This is the cheap option. If they can't afford this they can't afford much of anything (this 2015 article states the cost of a new-built T-90SM is 4.5 million).

To the best of my knowledge the T-90M/SM/AM/MS are essentially the same tank. In other words, it's already in the game There are some options offered by the manufacturer, including a 12.7mm machine gun for the RWS and Arena APS for the export version. The interesting speculation I have seen is that the Russians may put the Afghanit APS on their domestic version. We'll see!